The following article has been submitted to The Hamiltonian, by Brian Hatch. Your comments are welcome.
I was very discouraged and disappointed when I watched the interview of Mayor Bob Bratina by CBC Executive Producer Roger Gillespie posted on cbc.ca/hamilton on May18, 2012.
During the interview called, “17 Minutes with Mayor Bob Bratina”, Mayor Bratina makes the following disturbing comments about being the first mayor in the history of Hamilton to be censured by council:
At 6:48 into the interview the mayor is asked: “How do you explain that you were censured by city council?” His answer: “I can’t. If you asked me what the censure was, I’m not sure I could tell you.”
Later in the interview Bratina was asked if he could have “managed that conflict” better. During his reply
Bratina states: “For me to show the city the realities of the politics I have to expose myself to things like censure from a group who I don’t think can accurately define what the censure was.” Bratina then goes on to state that he talked to several of the councillors after the meeting and asked one. “Why did you do that?” According to Bratina that councillor’s answer was very vague at best: “Oh you know because you kept bringing it up. All this business of salary and so on.”
I am disappointed because Mayor Bratina still proclaims he does not know why council censured him. Perhaps there is a “failure to communicate” between council and the mayor?
I am discouraged because based of Bratina’s second comment when he states he believes that none of the “group” (council) can “accurately define what the censure was.”
To you (my) Councillor Ferguson and to you Councillors Whitehead and Partridge on the Accountability and Transparency Sub-committee and to you Councillor Merulla who put forth the motion to censure and to you Councillor Collins who seconded the motion to censure and to the remaining Councillors who voted unanimously to censure Mayor Bratina my question is: Can you “accurately define” why you voted for censure? Based on the manner the motion was dealt with in council on Mar. the 28th I know your decision was not made lightly. I know each of you gave the motion considerable thought.
Our Mayor, your leader, has stated you are not able to articulate why you voted for the motion to censure him. Can you? Or perhaps more importantly will you? Why exactly did you Councilor(s) vote for censure?
I truly believe Mayor Bratina still does not appreciate how inappropriate/offensive his actions were and are.
I would also urge all readers to view the entire interview at cbc.ca because there are two additional bizarre segments.
The first is at 9:25 into the interview when he talks about the Ali vs. Foreman fight and the rope-a-dope tactic used by Ali. Ali was on the ropes for most of the fight but in the end Ali was still standing and Foreman was on the canvas. Mayor “Ali” (aka Bob) is on the ropes and taking a pounding. I think in this case Mayor Bob thinks we are the “dope(s)” (aka Foreman). We will all have to wait until the election in 2014 to see who is still standing and who is on the floor.
The second is at 10:55 into the interview when the mayor talks about other councillors who “were convicted of things”, “leaked confidential information”, and “did not disclose conflicts.” Is the mayor really suggesting that because others have behaved badly in the past that he should not be held accountable now?
Regards
Brian Hatch
Ancaster
I think councilors were quite clear on the onset of Mayor Bob tenure that they were going to buck and put Bratina in his place.Duval was certainly overt in the front page of the Spectator of what council had in mind for Bratina. They had a window to do just that and they did. If censure was as a result of his chief of staff salary, was her salary increase ever rescinded? I believe that the motivation behind the censure was a personal vendetta.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Bob Bratina had a fair chance from even before he took the office. I agree with you Yves. And council needs to understand that they are not his equal. They have an equal vote, but he is the mayor and he represents Hamilton. Like it or not.
DeleteSevern
This censure was designed to embarrass the mayor politically. It ended up embarrassing the city and council instead.
ReplyDeleteSorce
Talk about 'diametrically-opposed' reactions to the same situation. 'Two people in the same circumstances having entirely different experiences.'
ReplyDeleteI never saw the censure as being 'designed to embarrass the mayor politically'. I guess I see 'remonstrate' and 'embarrass' as being two different actions. As for embarrassing 'the city' and Council instead... Not sure if you're talking about The City as in the corporate entity, or its residents en masse, but I don't agree either way; those who fully-and unreservedly support Mayor Bratina will not find this CBC segment 'embarrassing', in fact, they'll probably see it in a far more positive light. (Interpret that statement as you will.) And the rest of us? Well, I'm not embarrassed. This is an internal issue, and frankly, nobody outside of Hamilton is paying attention or is remotely interested. As for Council... Well, I suppose what's embarrassing for them isn't the censure itself, it's that this is a case of 'Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.' This is the second time Mayor Bratina has managed to utter 'Na-na-na-boo-boo!' in reaction to a situation where his behaviour, his sense of propriety and his deportment as mayor has been questioned.
What I think might be embarrassing is that our engagement construct at 71 Main Street West -that of 'We'll look after this, just let us do our jobs'- has been shown to be decidedly lacking. Of course, this isn't embarrassing to those who don't care/aren't engaged, and it won't be embarrassing to those who believe that term limits are the answer, because it provides them fuel to crank up the sirens once again.
Clearly, we need to go back to Square 1 and ask ourselves 'What do we expect from our leaders at City Hall?' This isn't the same as what's on paper regarding accountability and transparency, this actually has to do with how invested we are as 'employers'.
Of course you are entitled to your opinion. I have many business associates that hail from Toronto, Burlington etc. You might be surprised how many are dialed in to Hamilton issues; some of which have taken to reading The Hamiltonian based on my emailing articles from time to time. My sense is that they don't take this council seriously and often comment on the circus-like, unbusiness-like atmosphere.
DeleteSorce
LOL
Delete"Of course you are entitled to your opinion."
2. I am going to make it a point to be more cordial with my comments. I am far from backing down at all, but just being more cordial.
God bless you, Sorce!
Trust me when I say that I am being as cordial as I can. I never claimed perfection and in line of work, I am not paid to be cordial.
DeleteSorce
My dear MSC...I love you more when you wear your brievete beret.
DeleteThere's no going back to "Square 1", we couldn't find it; we, citizens, are not "employers" for we have no authority to fire any employees at City Hall (let's leave elections out of it for now); internal issues, once out of the bag, that show the Mayor, Council and City Manager in a not-so-hot light are embarrassing in the true sense of the word.
The fact that the Mayor is even discussing, and now dismissing, the censure is embarrassing for his first comments after the fact should have been his last until his term is finished; that would have been the respectable manner in which a good leader moves on and leads.
Anytone who hinders, impairs, or complicates City issues (internal or otherwise) is courting embarrassment; the simple Visionary road (including the City "Team" working progressively together) that the Mayor, City Manager, and councillors keep approving, printing and falsely measuring is embarrassing.
Yup, I'm pretty well spent with the whole censure affair and I'd rather know what the Mayor ate for breakfast than what he brought up at lunch...naturally, to avoid any embarrassment, I'm referring to his words and not his digestion.
I's rather know what 80% plus of council think of our vision not being pursued and less than 50% of our staff having performance reviews. Wouldn't you?
DeleteSevern
Two of the things the mayor was censured for were 1. Deliberately and falsely blaming staff for an unpopular and city policy-contravening decision, a decision made by the mayor himself alone - then supposedly apologizing to staff member involved, and the public via council for that (although both apologies were weak at best) and then a little while later repeated the lie, publicly and in print! 2.Threatening staff with having to sign sworn affidavits regarding release of information re "Sunshine List." (Threat made without legal department advice, and without any communication on the matter with council). There is a specific council motion on this, with background leading to the motion - worth checking out for clarity as to what is going on in this matter. I am truly amazed at how anyone can accept this kind of behavior and consider the censure just a political vendetta, an attempt to embarrass the mayor. Integrity, honesty, transparency not of any value to those who would think/say such things?
ReplyDeleteDon't act like Bratina invented the art of political finessing. Sometimes politicians are't upfront about everything all of the time. What part of that surprises you?
DeletePolitical finessing does not equate to outright lying, repeatedly, in print and in other media. And throwing a staff member under the bus for his own ill-considered decisions (twice) is completely unacceptable in my view. Any defenders of such behaviour surely must not consider integrity, respect for staff, willingness to adhere to city policies of any importance to being an elected official.
DeleteThere's political finessing, and then there's lying, breaking the code of conduct and the procedural bylaw. If Bratina hadn't done these things he could easily just explain his way out. Instead he's trying to paint the situation as if he's not at fault at all. Was Larry DiIanni's electoral impropriety just political finessing? Was Dave Mitchell's attempt to use his position to get out of speeding tickets just political finessing? I'm sorry you want to pass off deceit and treachery as some kind of clever tactic, but the rest of us expect better of our elected officials
DeletePoliticians don't outright lie? What planet?
DeleteThis very public lie improperly passed blame onto a member of City staff and her entire department. If we're trying to become a better City, maybe we should start by not allowing our elected representatives to abuse staff and create a poison working environment. We've lost enough senior staff, with valuable institutional knowledge, let's not lose any more, it costs us money.
DeleteI concur with Yves this censor was ridiculous!!
ReplyDeleteThose who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
I think the Mayor will reveal the goings on inside council chambers and City Hall..His calling as a media personal will always be first and foremost-which like his Mayorship is a service to the public.. truth seeking as it is the right of the people of Hamiton to have open transparency..
Bratina is in a no win situation, so I think he should just be Bob Bratina
DeleteMr. Bratina ran for and won the position to be, act, and lead as Mayor. imho, the time and money vested and wasted in the censure orb was a grave, and embarrassing, mistake on council's part and I wish the Mayor would take the high road and spare us the past gritty details.
DeleteIt would be lovely if the Mayor took a giant leap and ask council and the City Manager how, exactly, have we met and exceeded the City's Vision. As well, insist that by year's end employee performance reviews will reach the 100% mark. Now, that would be music to our ears.
I agree with Serendipity. The best way to curb all this B.S. is to show that you prefer to focus on what really matters. Start with leadership on the vision statement. Demand better performance in the form of performance agreements being completed in a less than glacial pace. Then defend your position tooth and nail; with or without the rest of council. Hamiltonians will respond and finally vote the drama masters out.
ReplyDeleteSorce
Hamilton has not had a dynamic mayor since Sam Lawrence. Sad but true. Some will say Copps, and that may be a close second, but he gutted the core. Hamilton's top office has a history of being a lint trap.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete